| Literature DB >> 32019231 |
Maria Fraga-Corral1,2, Paula García-Oliveira1, Antia G Pereira1,2, Catarina Lourenço-Lopes1, Cecilia Jimenez-Lopez1,2, Miguel Angel Prieto1, Jesus Simal-Gandara1.
Abstract
Tannins are polyphenolic compounds naturally found in vegetables. Their presence in nature has prompted their historical use in many different ways. The revision of their traditional utilization has allowed their further modification aiming for an industrial application. Sometimes these modifications have implied the addition of harmful substances such as formaldehyde, classified as a carcinogen of category B1. In other cases, these natural tannins have been replaced by synthetic compounds that threaten human and animal health and damage the environment. Therefore, currently, both academy and industry are searching for the substitution of these unsafe complexes by the increasing inclusion of tannins, natural molecules that can be obtained from several and diverse renewable resources, modified using harmless additives. To achieve promising results, cost-efficient and eco-friendly extraction methods have been designed. Once these green alternatives have been isolated, they have been successfully applied to many fields with very assorted aims of utilization such as coagulants, adhesives, floatation agents, tannings, dyes, additives, or biomolecules. Therefore, this review offers a global vision of the full process that involves the tannin's technological application including an overview of the most relevant tannin sources, effective extraction methods, and their utilization in very diverse fields.Entities:
Keywords: additives; human and animal health; industrial application; natural molecules; tannins; traditional utilization
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32019231 PMCID: PMC7037717 DOI: 10.3390/molecules25030614
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1Chemical structure of common molecules found along with the tannins class. (A) Galloyl unit, (B) penta-O-galloyl-beta-d-glucose (PGG), (C) hexahydroxydiphenic acid, (D) phloroglucinol, (E) catechin and gallocatechin, (F) epimers of catechin and gallocatechin.
Major sources of tannins. Species and their target tissues considered as a source of both hydrolysable and condensed tannin types by the determination of the concentration of these molecules using different detection methods and expressed in mg/g of dry weight (dw), except when other units were indicated.
| Species | Tissue | Type | Method | Concentration ( | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Nut | H and C | HPLC | 0.22 ± 0.11 H; 4.66 ± 2.28 C | [ |
| Kernel (K) and nutshell (N) | C | Vanillin-HCl | 0.4–5.3 C (K); 0.5–876 C (N) | [ | |
|
| Nut | H and C | HPLC | 0.05 ± 0.01 H; 0.06 ± 0.03 C | [ |
|
| Juice and extracts | H and C | ST | 0.04 ± 0.01 H; 1.14 ± 0.50 C | [ |
| Fruit | H and C | HPLC | 0.77 ± 0.006 H; 0.99 ± 0.08 C | [ | |
|
| Fruit | H and C | HPLC | 2.10 ± 0.60 H; 0.25 ± 0.20 C | [ |
|
| Fruit | H and C | HPLC | 2.43 ± 0.83 H; 0.38 ± 0.35 C | [ |
|
| Fruit, seeds, juice (J) | H | HPLC | 0.12 ± 0.06 H; 7–1169 mg/L (J) | [ |
| Fruit | H | HPLC, ST | 2.35–55.5 H | [ | |
|
| Fruit | H and C | ST | 0.55–0.95 H | [ |
|
| Fruit | H | HPLC | 0.27 ± 0.07 H; 1.62 ± 0.95 C | [ |
|
| Leaves and twigs | C | RDABA | 57–273 C | [ |
|
| Leaves | C | RDABA | 25–186 C | [ |
|
| Leaves and stems | C | RDABA | 26–169 C | [ |
|
| Leaves and twigs | C | RDABA | 40–186 C | [ |
|
| Fruits and bark | H and C | HPLC | 0.7–89 H; | [ |
| Fruits | H and C | HPLC | 126–822 H and C | [ | |
|
| Wood | H | HPLC, GC | 19.26–47.26 H | [ |
| Leaves | H and C | HPLC | 0.72–60.67 HT; 47–103C | [ | |
|
| Needles | C | HPLC | 70–80 C | [ |
|
| Leaves | H and C | HPLC | 93.57 H + Phloroglucinol | [ |
| Leaves | H and C | ST | [ | ||
|
| Bark | C | Butanol-HCl | 235 | [ |
| HPLC | 108 C | ||||
|
| Pod | H and C | Butanol-HCl | 4.6 C | [ |
| HPLC | 647 H | ||||
|
| Heartwood | C | Butanol-HCl | 123 C | [ |
| HPLC | 164 C |
Tannin types: Hydrolysable and condensed (H and C), hydrolysable (H), condensed (C). High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), gas chromatography (GC), spectrophotometric techniques (ST), radial diffusion, and acid butanol (spectrophotometric) assays (RDABA).
Extraction methods for scaling up to the industry use of tannins. Different vegetal matrixes, considered tannin sources, have been tested using diverse extraction techniques combined with different experimental conditions (mostly based on aqueous (aq) dilutions), have been applied to different vegetal matrixes that yield variable recovery rates expressed as mg/g (except when g/L, percentage or m/g expressed as gallic acid equivalents (GAE) or catechin monohydrate equivalents (CME) are indicated), and diverse relative costs (L for low, M for moderate, and H for high) are presented for the extraction of tannins and which may allow their industrial scale up.
| Method | Conditions | Source | Recovery (mg/g) | Relative Cost (L, M, H) | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 1% NaOH (aq) | 4.071 | L | [ | |
| 1% Na2SO3 (aq) | 0.609 | L | |||
| 1.5% EtOH (aq) | 62.8 CME | L | [ | ||
| 66% EtOH (aq) | Grape by-products | 12.3 g/L | L | [ | |
| 40% EtOH (aq) | Acorn | 80% | L | [ | |
| Ionic liquid A |
| 85% | M/H | [ | |
| Ionic liquid B 0.5 M | Grape skin | 60.1 | M/H | [ | |
|
| CO2 + EtOH 70%; 40 °C; 10 MPa | 26.38 | H | [ | |
| CO2 + MeOH 40%; 80 °C; 65 MPa | Grape seeds | 770 | H | [ | |
| CO2 + EtOH; 50 °C; 18.80 MPa | 499.90 | H | [ | ||
| CO2 + EtOH 10%; 50 °C; 10 MPa | 75.61 | H | [ | ||
| CO2, 50 °C, 30 MPa | 340 | H | [ | ||
|
| H2O; 50 °C; 150 MPa | 70.90 | H | [ | |
| H2O; RT; 250 MPa |
| 93.86 | H | [ | |
| H2O; 100 °C; 2 MPa | Larch wood | 381.90 | H | [ | |
| H2O; 100 °C; 10,34 MPa | Grape pomace | 52.90 | H | [ | |
| H2O; 140 °C; 4 MPa |
| 72.23 GAE | H | [ | |
|
| EtOH 70%; 125 W | Grape seeds | 528 | H | [ |
| MeOH 60% | Grape by-products | 22.27 mg/L | H | [ | |
| EtOH 45%; 340 W | 4.11 | H | [ | ||
| H2O; 150 W | 47.64 | H | [ | ||
| EtOH; 150 W | 30.29 | ||||
| EtOH (aq); 400 W |
| 528.5 | H | [ | |
| EtOH 96%; |
| 71.15 GAE | H | [ | |
|
| MeOH 90%; 140 W | 127 | L | [ | |
| EtOH 44%; 500 W | Grape by-products | 86.67 | L | [ | |
| dH2O; 301 W |
| 27.23 | L | [ | |
| EtOH (aq); 1200 W |
| 491.20 | L | [ | |
| EtOH (aq) + ME; 1200 W | 543.50 | ||||
| Ionic liquid B 2.5 M + ME; 1200 W | 630.2 | ||||
| EtOH 96%; 216 W |
| 71.78 GAE | L | [ |
Room temperature (RT); aqueous dilutions (aq); deionized water (dH2O); water (H2O); ethanol (EtOH); methanol (MeOH); ionic liquids: A: Dimethylammonium dimethylcarbamate; B: 1-butyl-3-methylimidazolium bromide. Solid/liquid extraction (SLE); superfluid extraction (SFE); pressurized water extraction (PWE); microwave extraction (ME); ultrasonic extraction (UE).